alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Breadcrumb

1. Home

2. Print 

3. Pdf 

4. Node 

5. Entity Print 

How Should Attending Veterinarians

Contact USDA?

Last Modified: 

Print

Attending Veterinarian Information - Select a Topic - ▾ Go

Attending veterinarians are highly encouraged to contact the USDA whenever they

have concerns or questions about regulatory requirements for licensees and

registrants or the role of the attending veterinarian. USDA may also be able to offer

suggestions for addressing welfare challenges.

The USDA inspector assigned to a facility will be the best point of contact because

they will already be familiar with the facility and the details of its operation.

If you are unsure who is or how to contact your facility’s assigned inspector, please

reach out to the Supervisory Animal Care Specialist for your state. They will be able

to provide contact information for the inspector or address your questions or

concerns directly.

You can also contact USDA through our customer support email at

AnimalCare@usda.gov or call (970) 494-7478.

Resource for Species-Related Information
USDA also has veterinarians on staff with expertise in zoo and exotic animals,

marine mammals, and nonhuman primates. These specialists are available to

provide information on nutrition, health, environmental considerations, and other

care or veterinary topics. If an attending veterinarian would like to speak with a

USDA species specialist, they can contact their USDA inspector to arrange a

consultation.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Centennial
Communications Corp. (the "Company") for the quarter ended November 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
such officer's knowledge:

         (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Date: January 9, 2004

/s/ Michael J. Small
--------------------
Michael J. Small
Chief Executive Officer and Director

                                       58
INTHE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Supreme Court Case No.DA 20-0055 RYAN JONES, Appellant/Plaintiff vs. MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY, aUnit of the Montana University System & Subdivision

of the State of Montana, Appellee/Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING SECOND EXTENSION
OF TIME TO FILE OPENING BRIEF Appellant/Plaintiff Ryan Jones has moved the Court, pursuant
to Mont. R. App. P. 26(2), for asecond 30 -day extension from April 10, 2020, upto and including May 11, 2020, in which to file his opening brief in this matter.

Itis supported by the affidavit of counsel. Appellee, Montana State University, does not opposethe motion. Pursuant

to the authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), and good cause having been shown, Appellant, Ryan Jones, is given anextension
of time up to and including May 11, 2020, tofile his opening brief. DATED this day of April, 2020. Supreme Court JusticeElectronically signed by:Mike McGrathChief Justice, Montana Supreme CourtApril 6 202004/06/2020Case Number: DA 20-0055
Exhibit 31.b

I, Marc Teal, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Boston Capital Tax Credit Fund III L.P.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



1. designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
2. evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
3. disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and





1. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



1. all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
2. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.



|Date:  February 21, 2006 | /s/ Marc N. Teal                          
|------------------------ | ------------------------------------------
|                         | Marc N. Teal, 
Principal Financial Officer
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 6, 2011

t0829 

# Order

September 6, 2011

142740

JAMES E. PEASE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 142740 COA: 293305 Wayne CC: 97-731630-DO MARY JANE PEASE, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 27, 2011 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### State v. Slepoy

26601

06/24/2005

Vacated & remanded
177 P.3d 1278

SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I

#### State v. Kolia

28071

01/29/2008

Denied

116 Hawai'i 29, 169 P.3d 981
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>      1

<S>               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                    MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                            1,167,807
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    32,794,283
<ALLOWANCES>                                              0
<INVENTORY>                                      39,558,092
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 84,097,504
<PP&E>                                           63,666,447
<DEPRECIATION>                                            0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  181,930,051
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           126,000,146
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                            151,110
<OTHER-SE>                                       44,290,722
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    181,930,051
<SALES>                                          53,566,249
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 53,566,249
<CGS>                                            43,181,794
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    43,181,794
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 12,759,739
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                3,093,693
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (5,466,746)
<INCOME-TAX>                                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5,466,746)
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (5,466,746)
<EPS-BASIC>                                           (.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.36)


</TABLE>
Navigate to Homepage
Search
Main navigation
  

        
              Explore the Capitol Campus
                          Art
                            Buildings & Grounds
                            Capitol Hill Facts
                            Visitor Resources
                            Our Blog
                            What We Do
                          Areas of Expertise
                            Programs & Ceremonies
                            Projects
                            Publications
                            Strategic Objectives
                            About Us
                          Who We Are
                            History of the AOC
                            News & Notices
                            Organizational Structure
                            Partnerships & Recognition
                            Work With UsSearch Breadcrumb
    HomeExplore the Capitol CampusThe Art Collection
Canal and Locks
        
                  The Basics
      
Artist
      
Allyn Cox

EverGreene Painting Studios

Materials
    Oil on Canvas

Year
    1994

Location
      
U.S. Capitol Building
          Cox Corridors

Along the Erie Canal at Lockport, New York, horses are shown pulling the barges that have just gone through the locks.About the Cox Corridors MuralsThe first floor of the U.S. Capitol's House wing is elaborately decorated with wall and ceiling murals by artist Allyn Cox. The western north-south corridor, called the Westward Expansion corridor, includes maps and scenes showing the growth of the United States from early exploration through the acquisition of Alaska and Hawaii. Serve. Preserve. Inspire.

              Contact Us
                            Accountability
                            Hill Staff Resources
                            AOC Staff Resources
Utility
  

        
              Privacy Policy
                            Image Terms of Use
                            Inspector General
                            U.S. Botanic Garden
                            U.S. Capitol Visitor CenterFacebook
	Twitter
	Flickr
	YouTube
	Instagram
	Subscribe
21769

#### State v. Lile

Affirmed
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER> 1


<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                                      JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                        SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                                6,741,142
<SECURITIES>                                          3,005,742
<RECEIVABLES>                                         7,093,962
<ALLOWANCES>                                            210,211
<INVENTORY>                                           6,038,547
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     23,665,896
<PP&E>                                                4,202,013
<DEPRECIATION>                                        1,278,170
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       33,913,312
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 5,926,366
<BONDS>                                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                 59,693
<OTHER-SE>                                           25,966,162
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         33,913,312
<SALES>                                               6,791,318
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      6,791,318
<CGS>                                                 3,209,920
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         5,918,065
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       34,873
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                       1,029,914
<INCOME-TAX>                                          1,304,246
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                           0
<DISCONTINUED>                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                          2,334,160
<EPS-BASIC>                                                 .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               .36


</TABLE>
141 P.3d 1047

SUPREME COURT OF HAWAI'I

#### State v. Chatman

26763

08/03/2006

Affirmed in part, vacated in part
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

ARSUS, LLC, A UTAH ENTITY,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

JOHN H. FIRMAGE, INC., A UTAH ENTITY, DBA 

BMW OF MURRAY,

Defendant-Appellee

______________________

2019-1224

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

District of Utah in No. 1:17-cv-00125-DB, Senior Judge Dee 

V. Benson.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

PATRICK BRIGHT, Wagner, Anderson & Bright, PC, Los 

Angeles, CA, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by TODD E. ZENGER, Duren IP, PC, Salt Lake City, 

UT. 

 JOSEPH P. LAVELLE, DLA Piper US LLP, Washington, 

DC, argued for defendant-appellee. 

______________________
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is 

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

 PER CURIAM (PROST, Chief Judge, WALLACH and 

HUGHES, Circuit Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

October 4, 2019 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

 Date Peter R. Marksteiner

Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 11

                             LASERSIGHT INCORPORATED
                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                             Three Months Ended              Nine Months Ended
                                                                September 30,                   September 30,
                                                          2001            2000             2001             2000
                                                          ----            ----             ----             ----
<S>                                                     <C>              <C>              <C>             <C>

BASIC AND DILUTED

       Weighted average shares outstanding             26,392,000       21,689,000       24,691,000       20,420,000
                                                     ============     ============     ============     ============

       Net loss                                      $ (6,516,188)      (4,517,189)     (17,668,814)      (9,391,002)
                                                     ============     ============     ============     ============

       Basic loss per share                          $      (0.25)           (0.21)           (0.72)           (0.46)
                                                     ============     ============     ============     ============

ADDITIONAL DILUTED CALCULATION

       Net loss, above                               $ (6,516,188)      (4,517,189)     (17,668,814)      (9,391,002)
                                                     ============     ============     ============     ============

       Additional adjustment to weighted average
         number of shares:

       Weighted average shares outstanding
         above                                         26,392,000       21,689,000       24,691,000       20,420,000
       Dilutive effect of stock options, warrants
         and convertible  preferred stock               1,360,000        2,236,000        1,681,000        3,771,000
                                                     ------------     ------------     ------------     ------------

       Weighted average number of shares, adjusted     27,752,000       23,925,000       26,372,000       24,191,000
                                                     ============     ============     ============     ============

       Diluted loss per share, adjusted (A)          $      (0.23)           (0.19)           (0.67)           (0.39)
                                                     ============     ============     ============     ============
</TABLE>


(A)  This calculation is submitted in accordance with Regulation S-K item
     601(b)(11) although it is contrary to paragraph 13-14 of FASB Statement No.
     128 because it produces an anti-dilutive result.
#### Forest Box & Lumber Co., Appellant, *v.*Fraser Brace Overseas Corp. et al., Doing Business under the Name of Frazer-Brace-Terminal Constructors, Respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

February 19, 1959.

*620
      *Abraham WilJcenfeld*and *Joseph Lewis Simon*for appellant.

*Arthur H. Christy, United States Attorney (Willian S. Ellis*of counsel), for respondents.

*Per Curiam.*

Questions of interpretation of contract terms and specifications are not disputes as to questions of fact, and a determination by the United States Army contracting officer under a contract making his decisions on questions of fact binding on the parties is not binding on the plaintiff here, where such determination involved interpretation of written specifications. (U. S. Code, tit. 41, § 322; *Pfotzer*v. *United States,*77 F. Supp. 390; *Johnson Contr. Corp.*v. *United States,*132 F. Supp. 698.) Dismissal of plaintiff’s first cause of action on the ground that the contracting officer’s decision was binding was therefore improper.

The order insofar as it dismisses the first cause of action should be reversed and the motion and cross motion seeking summary judgment with respect thereto denied, with $10 costs to plaintiff.

Hecht, J. P.

(dissenting). I dissent.

In my view it is reasonable to conclude that the contract here required the plaintiff to reduce the moisture in the wood-flooring. after the fire retarding process. Otherwise it would have been meaningless to provide for guaranteed delivery in *90*days, since it is conceded that air drying required one year to bring the moisture content to the desired percentage.

It appears that the dispute here was in respect of a question of fact, that is the requirements of the contract and facts concerning the treatment of lumber in order to render that lumber fit for its announced and intended use.

Consequently, the decision of the Government contracting officer was binding upon plaintiff.

Aurelio and Tilzer, JJ., concur in *Per Curiam*opinion; Hecht, J. P., dissents with memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 276 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 276

Honoring the National Association of Women Business Owners on its 40th 
                              anniversary.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 19, 2015

 Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York (for herself and Mrs. Blackburn) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                         on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Honoring the National Association of Women Business Owners on its 40th 
                              anniversary.

Whereas women-owned businesses are one of the fastest-growing segments of the 
        United States economy;
Whereas 13,600,000 firms are 50 percent or more owned by women, and these 
        businesses employ nearly 15,900,000 people and generate 
        $2,700,000,000,000 in revenue as of 2013;
Whereas empowering more women entrepreneurs and business owners is important to 
        the Nation's economic future;
Whereas the National Association of Women Business Owners (NAWBO) was 
        established in 1975 by a group of like-minded businesswomen to serve as 
        the collective voice of women business owners across the country and 
        advocate on behalf of their entrepreneurial interests;
Whereas NAWBO's roots are in public policy, and NAWBO played an integral role in 
        the passage of H.R. 5050, the Women's Business Ownership Act of 1988;
Whereas NAWBO remains focused on collaborating to create a business-friendly 
        environment at the national, State, and local levels to enable women to 
        start and grow their businesses and create jobs; and
Whereas NAWBO represents a diverse universe of women business owners across an 
        array of sectors in the United States: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives commends the National 
Association of Women Business Owners for its tireless efforts and 
decades of support of women entrepreneurs and business owners and 
congratulates the National Association of Women Business Owners on its 
40th anniversary.
                                 <all>
```